Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Add filters

Document Type
Year range
Homeopathy ; 2021 Oct 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1475535


BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, several homeopathic prognostic factor research (PFR) projects have been undertaken. We found two projects with comparable outcomes to assess consistency and possible flaws. METHODS: Two comparisons were made. (1) Outcome of a PFR data collection from the Liga Medicorum Homoeopathica Internationalis (LMHI) by about 100 doctors with 541 cases was compared with a previous analysis of 161 cases in the same database. (2) The updated LMHI database was also compared with a data collection carried out in India by four doctors with a total of 1,445 cases. Differences that resulted in conflicting outcomes (indication in one, contraindication in the other) were examined for possible causes. RESULTS: There was only a single outcome in the updated LMHI database that conflicted with the previous dataset, and this could have been due to statistical variation. The Indian data contained many cases, from few doctors, while the LMHI database had few cases per doctor, but many doctors. The overlap between the projects (individual cases entered in both) was between zero and 22%. In 72 comparisons we found six (8.3%) conflicting outcomes. Possible causes were statistical error due to small numbers of cases and/or observers, confirmation bias, and keynote prescribing if this resulted in symptoms being inadequately checked. CONCLUSION: There was little conflict between the outcomes of the two versions of one project and between the two different PFR projects. Differences could mostly be explained by causes that can be managed. This consistency should primarily be interpreted as showing a strong overall consensus between homeopathic practitioners worldwide, but with variation of consensus between small groups of practitioners.

Homeopathy ; 111(1): 57-65, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1402156


BACKGROUND: Prognostic factor research (PFR), prevalence of symptoms and likelihood ratio (LR) play an important role in identifying prescribing indications of useful homeopathic remedies. It involves meticulous unbiased collection and analysis of data collected during clinical practice. This paper is an attempt to identify causes of bias and suggests ways to mitigate them for improving the accuracy in prescribing for better clinical outcomes and execution of randomized controlled studies. METHODS: A prospective, open label, observational study was performed from April 2020 to December 2020 at two COVID Health Centers. A custom-made Excel spreadsheet containing 71 fields covering a spectrum of COVID-19 symptoms was shared with doctors for regular reporting. Cases suitable for PFR were selected. LR was calculated for commonly occurring symptoms. Outlier values with LR ≥5 were identified and variance of LRs was calculated. RESULTS: Out of 1,889 treated cases of confirmed COVID-19, 1,445 cases were selected for pre-specified reasons. Nine medicines, Arsenicum album, Bryonia alba, Gelsemium sempervirens, Pulsatilla nigricans, Hepar sulphuricus, Magnesia muriaticum, Phosphorus, Nux vomica and Belladonna, were most frequently prescribed. Outlier values and large variance for Hepar sulphuricus and Magnesia muriaticum were noticed as indication of bias. Confirmation bias leading to lowering of symptom threshold, keynote prescribing, and deficiency in checking of all symptoms in each case were identified as the most important sources of bias. CONCLUSION: Careful identification of biases and remedial steps such as training of doctors, regular monitoring of data, checking of all pre-defined symptoms, and multicenter data collection are important steps to mitigate biases.

COVID-19 , Homeopathy , Bias , Data Collection , Humans , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
Homeopathy ; 110(3): 160-167, 2021 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1209205


BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a new disease; its clinical profile and natural history are evolving. Each well-recorded case in homeopathic practice is important for deciding the future course of action. This study aims at identifying clinically useful homeopathic remedies and their prescribing symptoms using the prognostic factor research model. METHODS: This was an open-label, multi-centric, observational study performed from April 2020 to July 2020 at various public health care clinics. The data were collected prospectively from clinical practice at integrated COVID-19 care facilities in India. Good-quality cases were selected using a specific set of criteria. These cases were analyzed for elucidating prognostic factors by calculating the likelihood ratio (LR) of each frequently occurring symptom. The symptoms with high LR values (>1) were considered as prescribing indications of the specific remedy. RESULTS: Out of 327 COVID-19 cases reported, 211 met the selection criteria for analysis. The most common complaints were fatigue, sore throat, dry cough, myalgia, fever, dry mouth and throat, increased thirst, headache, decreased appetite, anxiety, and altered taste. Twenty-seven remedies were prescribed and four of them-Arsenicum album, Bryonia alba, Gelsemium sempervirens, and Pulsatilla nigricans-were the most frequently used. A high LR was obtained for certain symptoms, which enabled differentiation between the remedies for a given patient. CONCLUSION: Homeopathic medicines were associated with improvement in symptoms of COVID-19 cases. Characteristic symptoms of four frequently indicated remedies have been identified using prognostic factor research, findings that can contribute to accurate homeopathic prescribing during future controlled research in COVID-19.

COVID-19/therapy , Homeopathy , Adolescent , Adult , Female , Humans , India/epidemiology , Likelihood Functions , Male , Middle Aged , Prognosis , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Young Adult